Medical students impacted by discrimination: a qualitative study into their experiences of belonging and support systems at medical schools in the UK

OBJECTIVE

To better understand the broader experience of medical students impacted by discrimination and the support systems they engage with.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews.

SETTING

Four medical schools based in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

17 medical students were recruited using volunteer and snowball sampling: all students self-identified as being impacted by discrimination.

RESULTS

5 themes were identified: feelings of isolation, imposter syndrome and exclusion; a lack of representation and positive role modelling; the importance of peer support; issues relating to the accessibility of support; building support networks through shared experiences and attempts to foster a sense of inclusion through peer and institutionally led initiatives.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggest medical schools could do more to recognise the importance of acknowledging the multiple identities at risk of discrimination held by students, perpetuating feelings of isolation and exclusion. Our research highlights the need for practical systemic initiatives to improve the sense of belonging of medical students who are impacted by discrimination. Medical educators and institutions should consider formal and informal provisions, such as creating time and space for students to meet and share experiences, access support and reporting networks, to foster a greater sense of belonging.

Should IUI replace IVF as first-line treatment for unexplained infertility? A literature review

BACKGROUND

Unexplained infertility accounts for 25% of infertility causes in the UK. Active intervention methods, such as intrauterine insemination (IUI) or in vitro fertilisation (IVF), are often sought. Despite the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommending IVF for unexplained infertility, this recommendation has generated an ongoing debate, with few fertility clinics discontinuing the use of IUI as the first-line management of choice. In contrast to NICE, recent guidance released from the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) in August 2023 supports the use of IUI as first-line. High-quality evidence behind such interventions is lacking, with current literature providing conflicting results.

AIMS

This review aims to provide a literature overview exploring whether IUI or IVF should be used as first-line treatment for couples with unexplained infertility, in the context of current guidelines.

METHODS

The primary outcome used to assess efficacy of both treatment methods is live birth (LB) rates. Secondary outcomes used are clinical pregnancy (CP) and ongoing pregnancy (OP) rates. A comprehensive literature search of 4 databases: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Maternity & Infant Care and the Cochrane Library were searched in January 2022. Upon removal of duplications, abstract screening, and full-text screening, a total of 34 papers were selected.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

This review highlights a large discrepancy in the literature when examining pregnancy outcomes of IUI and IVF treatments. Evidence shows IUI increases LB and CP rates 3-fold compared to expectant management. Literature comparing IUI to IVF is less certain. The review finds the literature implies IVF should be used for first-line management but the paucity of high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs), coupled with heterogeneity of the identified studies and a lack of research amongst women > 40 years warrants the need for further large RCTs. The decision to offer IUI with ovarian stimulation (IUI-OS) or IVF should be based upon patient prognostic factors. We suggest that IUI-OS could be offered as first-line treatment for unexplained infertility for women < 38 years, with good prognosis, and IVF could be offered first to those > 38 years. Patients should be appropriately counselled to enable informed decision making.